I have read it but most people operate cars without having read the manuals. This is true of computers, causes, taxes, you name it. Most people are simply ignorant no matter their causes or beliefs. Most people don't hang out at computer forums or link to multipage articles to read just for fun. By simply typing here we probably aren't most people.

The point is pretty simple. If I cited a poll created by a trust founded with oil money that had given to the John Birch Society, how much credence would you give it?

The answer in this instance is, A LOT, because it fits the preconceptions you both have. If it didn't though, they they would simply be filthy lying polluters funding and spewing propaganda for their causes. I find the lack of questioning here sort of ironically funny.

Sure, valid point. Many conservative polls are push-polls or have flawed statistical methods. In fact, many polls in general do. I'm taking an advanced statistics course, and even with the right intentions, this stuff is complicated and it's easy to make a mistake in methodology!

So, trumpt if I'm interpreting you right, you are asserting the Pew is a liberal organization, and not only that, but you are asserting is lets this bias its reports.

According to Wikipedia,

"Joseph Pew and his heirs were politically conservative. The mission of the J. Howard Pew Freedom Trust was to "acquaint the American people with the evils of bureaucracy and the values of a free market and to inform our people of the struggle, persecution, hardship, sacrifice and death by which freedom of the individual was won." Joseph N. Pew, Jr., called Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, "a gigantic scheme to raze U.S. businesses to a dead level and debase the citizenry into a mass of ballot-casting serfs."[2]
Most of the early beneficiaries were such conservative organizations as the John Birch Society, the American Liberty League, and the American Enterprise Institute,[3][4] although other beneficiaries included a cancer research institute, a museum, higher education, the American Red Cross, and historically black colleges. For many years, the Trusts tended to fund charities and conservative causes in Philadelphia."

So the Birch Society contributed to the Pew Trust. You were saying?

Any time I've heard of Pew work, it's been really damn reputable and respectable. This isn't some crackpot organization, they do serious work. My exposure to their work has been that I've noticed many grants or environmental reports they have sponsored. You breath air and drink water so you should thank them for that alone.

As to bashing religion, far from it. From what I've read in the Bible so far I'm a fan of Jesus and I'm not bashing anyone's choices in what to believe. In fact I'll defend you, believe in what you think is right for you. But, when it starts to affect me or other people that is a whole different ball game. And furthermore, to address the topic of this thread: many (most?) religion people DO NOT ADHERE to their religion. At all. I mean, thou shalt not kill? Lie? How on Earth do Republicans pass muster on even a tiny fraction of the Ten Commandments? Let's dodge social or "family" issues. Let's talk financial politics. Republicans want to have 1% of the population have half the money. Again can anyone here who is religious and a Republican explain how that is Christ-like to me? The more I learn about Christianity the less patience I have with so-called "Christians" that don't live by or even know anything about their own religion. And I know this does not apply to all denominations or particular congregations. I try to never make absolute blanket statements. I am just meaning "most". For example, my own denomination I was confirmed in is very liberal and has a long history of funding environmental research and protection. I have only good memories and I value what I learned there, although I was only a kid and it was before I started to be political and philosophical. Of course no one there believed the Earth was 10,000 years old or anything, and it was a good atmosphere, with quite amazing food always as well!

I've gone on long enough for sure, I'll listen for ya'll's thoughts on this matter.

"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox

Trumpt you have read the entire Bible? Which version? Did you take notes and review to make sure you understood it? You have to read closely in parts, of course others are like a family tree and go on and on and on...Anyhow, regarding your analogy, that's kind of weak. So Christians get to tell everyone else how the world and everything in it works, but they deserve a free pass to basically just look at SparkNotes of the Bible?

And another quote from your Wikipedia link about Pew:

"The trust also helped fund the Gospel and Our Culture Network, which published books such as Missional Church: A vision for the sending of the Church in North America.[16]
"

That sounds pretty religion-friendly to me.

"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox

I put it to you that the survey is in fact an accurate snapshot and that it was not tilted in any way by any agenda. The questions are fairly neutral and are really more or less general knowledge.

In fact, not long ago, ANYONE would have known most of them - person of faith or otherwise.

I think it is more an issue of declining standards across the board. Of course some small groups of Christians do seem to make a concerted effort to stay in the dark but...

A bit of a profound question, if the general population doesn't know the general knowledge of a topic, can it still be valid to call it general?

I assure you, I do a lot of testing. A lot of bad assumptions can be made when using a small multiple choice test.

Quick points.... 32 questions to sample every major world religion. How can such a think be accurate? Could I sample what every knows in any other major field with 32 questions?

Second, what was the make up of the questions and was there anything that caused the question to perform poorly rather than the person being tested. If no one can get it right, then the question is probably flawed rather than the test subjects. The 15th question as an example only had 11% get it right no matter there religious or philosophical background. That to most testers would note that something in the wording is causing problems with the majority of those taking the test.

In this particular case, I'd note that while the Great First Awakening is interesting from a historical perspective and debating the effect on the American Revolution can be lots of fun, it is no form is formally associated with the practice of Christianity or what it means to be Christian. I think we could both agree on that could we not?

A good second example is the example question 11 related to appropriate reading of religious texts in an educational setting. Only 23% of all questioners got it correct and that is likely because the context of using it as an example of literature isn't well understood by the general public. This doesn't mean the general public is ignorant on religious matters. It means they are ignorant on educational matters so that makes it a bad question.

Using this understanding, it is easy to see that some of the questions aren't about religion so much as they are about understanding the historical and sociological implications and influences of religion on our society. If you claim to be a Christian and don't understand who that Jesus guy is, you've probably got a problem. If you don't know what literature examples happen to be, early influences on the American Revolution or don't understand the three part Lemon ruling, that doesn't mean you are religiously ignorant in my opinion.

Given that understand also, it is very likely that atheists and agnostics would be likely to do better because this isn't a quiz that measures religious knowledge but as I said the role of religion along with its historical and sociological implications. If you are an agnostic or atheist you would be more likely to think more about religion as an influence and if you are an activist atheist, you would be profoundly more likely to know the history and legal precedents related to trying to limit or remove religious influence. Thus you would be studying founder intent when trying to establish just cause for separation of church and state. You would fully understand when a religious text is being read to proselytize and when it is being read as an example of literature because it is in your interest when limiting religion to know such information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquatic

Sure, valid point. Many conservative polls are push-polls or have flawed statistical methods. In fact, many polls in general do. I'm taking an advanced statistics course, and even with the right intentions, this stuff is complicated and it's easy to make a mistake in methodology!

So, trumpt if I'm interpreting you right, you are asserting the Pew is a liberal organization, and not only that, but you are asserting is lets this bias its reports.

Quite the opposite. I was asserting exactly what I quoted. It is also what you quoted so I don't see how you missed it.

Quote:

Any time I've heard of Pew work, it's been really damn reputable and respectable. This isn't some crackpot organization, they do serious work. My exposure to their work has been that I've noticed many grants or environmental reports they have sponsored. You breath air and drink water so you should thank them for that alone.

My point is simply to note that plenty of people engage in ad-hom circumstantial fallacies but conveniently drop them when they find a point they believe supports their worldview. Pew money is old inherited oil money. If such facts make work from a source bad, then this is true always, not circumstantially. People cannot go from this thread to the global warming thread and declare certain studies from claimed tainted sources as invalid due to their energy concerns.

Quote:

As to bashing religion, far from it. From what I've read in the Bible so far I'm a fan of Jesus and I'm not bashing anyone's choices in what to believe. In fact I'll defend you, believe in what you think is right for you. But, when it starts to affect me or other people that is a whole different ball game. And furthermore, to address the topic of this thread: many (most?) religion people DO NOT ADHERE to their religion. At all. I mean, thou shalt not kill? Lie? How on Earth do Republicans pass muster on even a tiny fraction of the Ten Commandments? Let's dodge social or "family" issues. Let's talk financial politics. Republicans want to have 1% of the population have half the money. Again can anyone here who is religious and a Republican explain how that is Christ-like to me? The more I learn about Christianity the less patience I have with so-called "Christians" that don't live by or even know anything about their own religion. And I know this does not apply to all denominations or particular congregations. I try to never make absolute blanket statements. I am just meaning "most". For example, my own denomination I was confirmed in is very liberal and has a long history of funding environmental research and protection. I have only good memories and I value what I learned there, although I was only a kid and it was before I started to be political and philosophical. Of course no one there believed the Earth was 10,000 years old or anything, and it was a good atmosphere, with quite amazing food always as well!

I've gone on long enough for sure, I'll listen for ya'll's thoughts on this matter.

You raise some good points and also note the hypocritical interests. The problem becomes how these failings are assigned to religion, but forgiven for other fields of inquiry as to the nature of humans and solutions for how they should live. Are Republicans or any sort of politically motivated persons perfect Christians or even just perfect religious adherents? Of course not. However guess what, philosophers, scientists and well intentioned political advocates are just as easily hoisted upon their own petards. Thus they, in my view, do not hold any moral high ground over people who are religious.

Trumpt you have read the entire Bible? Which version? Did you take notes and review to make sure you understood it? You have to read closely in parts, of course others are like a family tree and go on and on and on...Anyhow, regarding your analogy, that's kind of weak. So Christians get to tell everyone else how the world and everything in it works, but they deserve a free pass to basically just look at SparkNotes of the Bible?

And another quote from your Wikipedia link about Pew:

"The trust also helped fund the Gospel and Our Culture Network, which published books such as Missional Church: A vision for the sending of the Church in North America.[16]
"

That sounds pretty religion-friendly to me.

Aquatic, honestly since an incident at a church I attended several years ago, I don't think I've picked up a Bible or wandered into a church since then. I was profoundly active through my teens and up through around my early 30's. I don't think I've ever come across as a strongly religious advocate on these forums. I simply don't discredit someone when I disagree with them though. I'm pretty sure it was the New International Version of the Bible and it was arranged as 2/3 the actual text and 1/3 vocabulary, historical context, explanation of various doctrines and methodologies at the time in question, etc.

I really don't see where your strange conclusions and litany of allegations are coming from related to matters religious. I think your prejudices are coloring your discussion here a bit to much to be useful.

I'm pretty sure it was the New International Version of the Bible and it was arranged as 2/3 the actual text and 1/3 vocabulary, historical context, explanation of various doctrines and methodologies at the time in question, etc.

Did you register any - how shall we put it?- discrepancies or contradictions during this reading?

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Did you register any - how shall we put it?- discrepancies or contradictions during this reading?

It doesn't really matter if I did or didn't because I'm not the type of person who disqualifies entire disciplines or worldviews using "gotcha" thinking. If something is a sound principle to live by, then it is true even if the people who suggested or articulated it are fallible.

I'd appreciate it if you responded to the bit about the questions themselves not being about religion. I clearly put some effort into that and there were questions where hardly anyone got the right answer. Part of good testing is having good questions. Do you not agree?

I'd appreciate it if you responded to the bit about the questions themselves not being about religion. I clearly put some effort into that and there were questions where hardly anyone got the right answer. Part of good testing is having good questions. Do you not agree?

Haven't read any politics for decades - but I guess I have it all internalized haha!

Actually I agree with you - I think the questions are skewed. They are also US-centric. I didn't know anything about the School Laws in the US so had to guess. This has nothing to do with religion imo.

Also the last question is very, very obscure. I knew the answer but only because he was from near my home town. But even in the UK hardly any religious person would know that - you'd have to be part of Edward's religious sect (very small) or from a small geographical area of Wales. Very few English religious people would know that.

So I agree...they are not religious questions. It's more like a pub quiz but one that actually tries to catch you out with the aim of making you seem stupid.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Haven't read any politics for decades - but I guess I have it all internalized haha!

Actually I agree with you - I think the questions are skewed. They are also US-centric. I didn't know anything about the School Laws in the US so had to guess. This has nothing to do with religion imo.

Also the last question is very, very obscure. I knew the answer but only because he was from near my home town. But even in the UK hardly any religious person would know that - you'd have to be part of Edward's religious sect (very small) or from a small geographical area of Wales. Very few English religious people would know that.

So I agree...they are not religious questions. It's more like a pub quiz but one that actually tries to catch you out with the aim of making you seem stupid.

This would mean atheists and agnostics are simply more educated and informed the religious people.

I contend that we are both believers. You just use different definitions of the words 'God' and 'belief' than I do. When you understand why you dismiss all other definitions you will understand why I also accept yours.

Segovius.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means.

Religion is a great force - the only real motive force in the world; but you must get at a man through his own religion, not through yours.

Christianity might be a good thing if anyone ever tried it.

The most dangerous book on earth, (the Bible) Keep it under lock and key.

Quote:

Shake off all fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.

We are afraid of the known and afraid of the unknown. That is our daily life and in that there is no hope, and therefore every form of philosophy, every form of theological concept, is merely an escape from the actual reality of what is. All outward forms of change brought about by wars, revolutions, reformations, laws and ideologies have failed completely to change the basic nature of man and therefore of society.

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

At bottom every man knows well enough that he is a unique being, only once on this earth; and by no extraordinary chance will such a marvelously picturesque piece of diversity in unity as he is, ever be put together a second time.

Faith: not wanting to know what is true.

Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled down (I do not say by what sort of feet) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its originbecause it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life! The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have grovelled in the dusta civilization beside which even that of our nineteenth century seems very poor and very senile".

Quote:

If you want to lose your faith, make friends with a priest.

A "sin" is something which is not necessary.

Man such as we know him, is a machine.

Believe nothing that you cannot verify for yourself.

Quote:

Power consists not in being able to strike another,
but in being able to control oneself when anger arises.

A perfect Muslim is one from whose tongue and hands mankind is safe.

To acquire knowledge is binding upon all Muslims, whether male or female.

The ink of the scholar is more holy than the blood of the martyr.

Deal gently with people, and be not harsh; cheer them and condemn not.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Apparently more than half of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the person who inspired the Protestant Reformation...ok....but about four in 10 Jews did not know that Maimonides, one of the greatest rabbis and intellectuals in history, was Jewish.

But there's more:

Forty-five percent of Roman Catholics who participated in the study didn't know that, according to church teaching, the bread and wine used in Holy Communion is not just a symbol, but becomes the body and blood of Christ.

By DYLAN LOVAN, Associated Press Writer Thu Oct 7, 5:32 am ET
LOUISVILLE, Ky. A Southern Baptist leader who is calling for Christians to avoid yoga and its spiritual attachments is getting plenty of pushback from enthusiasts who defend the ancient practice.

Southern Baptist Seminary President Albert Mohler says the stretching and meditative discipline derived from Eastern religions is not a Christian pathway to God.
Mohler said he objects to "the idea that the body is a vehicle for reaching consciousness with the divine."

Quote:

"That's just not Christianity," Mohler told The Associated Press.

"I'm really surprised by the depth of the commitment to yoga found on the part of many who identify as Christians," Mohler said.

Mohler argued in his online essay last month that Christians who practice yoga "must either deny the reality of what yoga represents or fail to see the contradictions between their Christian commitments and their embrace of yoga."

He said his view is "not an eccentric Christian position."

Other Christian leaders have said practicing yoga is incompatible with the teachings of Jesus. Pat Robertson has called the chanting and other spiritual components that go along with yoga "really spooky." California megachurch pastor John MacArthur called yoga a "false religion." Muslim clerics have banned Muslims from practicing yoga in Egypt, Malaysia and Indonesia, citing similar concerns.

And some yoga studios have made the techniques more palatable for Christians by removing the chanting and associations to eastern religions, namely Hinduism and its multiple deities.

Stephanie Dillon, who has injected Christian themes into her studio in Louisville, said yoga brought her closer to her Christian faith, which had faded after college and service in the Army.

"What I found is that it opened my spirit, it renewed my spirituality," Dillon said. "That happened first and then I went back to church." Dillon attends Southeast Christian Church in Louisville and says many evangelical Christians from the church attend her yoga classes.

Mohler said many people have written him to say they're simply doing exercises and forgoing yoga's eastern mysticism and meditation.

"My response to that would be simple and straightforward: You're just not doing yoga," Mohler said.

A recent Pew Research Center poll found that atheists and agnostics are more knowledgeable about religion than are people of faith. Many of my fellow atheists are smug about this, which is a shame. Gloating is arrogant. We should instead use our superior knowledge to patiently educate the rest of you nincompoops. I shall now take your questions about religion.

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

I don't have a problem with the study sego presented. I actually find it interesting. However, I do have a problem with him using it as another veiled attack on Christians. The implication is a common one...that being that Christians are ignorant, stupid, etc.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

I don't have a problem with the study sego presented. I actually find it interesting. However, I do have a problem with him using it as another veiled attack on Christians. The implication is a common one...that being that Christians are ignorant, stupid, etc.

What BR said.

Do you really intend to come on these public forums and suggest that I should claim that believing in a 4000 year old earth, denying evolution, believing dinosaurs and humans were contemporary...all these things are not stupid?

Surely you cannot be serious?

Stupidity is not limited to the religious if it helps but surely there is no benefit in not pointing these things out.....it's how we progress...

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

In reality, if there were only Adam and Eve at the beginning, it was a very limited gene pool that can't explain the diversity in the current human population. Evolution explains more about this than scripture.

A classic genetics case of inbreeding is in the royal lines in Europe. Queen Victoria's line had several recessive genetic disorders that could be traced between the related families.

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

In reality, if there were only Adam and Eve at the beginning, it was a very limited gene pool that can't explain the diversity in the current human population. Evolution explains more about this than scripture.

A classic genetics case of inbreeding is in the royal lines in Europe. Queen Victoria's line had several recessive genetic disorders that could be traced between the related families.

Adam and Eve is about a man doing what a woman told him to. It is about a man being hypnotized into committing a crime against the creator by pussy.
It is written by men as to say: " She made me do it, I was blinded by pussy and women are evil and pussy and it wasn't my fault, pussy.. poor me, I am helpless against pussy.... I am pussy. Even if god tells me what I should do pussy makes me break the law, kill, .... the only thing it doesn't do is make me think...."
The bible is chauvinist crap much like violent video games.

Do you really intend to come on these public forums and suggest that I should claim that believing in a 4000 year old earth, denying evolution, believing dinosaurs and humans were contemporary...all these things are not stupid?

Surely you cannot be serious?

Stupidity is not limited to the religious if it helps but surely there is no benefit in not pointing these things out.....it's how we progress...

Actually he was not defending any one of those assertions, that is a straw man plain and simple. Just relating to the original post itself and the assertion it makes and the assumptions drawn by those posting and piling on it. The article itself has none of this baggage, you and other have brought it along with you ad tried to saddle a particular group with it, whether they support it or not.

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

Actually he was not defending any one of those assertions, that is a straw man plain and simple. Just relating to the original post itself and the assertion it makes and the assumptions drawn by those posting and piling on it. The article itself has none of this baggage, you and other have brought it along with you ad tried to saddle a particular group with it, whether they support it or not.

He may not have been defending them but he was calling me out for calling Christians 'stupid' (which I did not do btw - so perhaps your Strawman antennae need attuning a bit more in his direction).

I replied with examples of ideas I think ARE stupid and I feel this is relevant as SOME CHRISTIANS DO hold these beliefs.

So if you were to be honest - and you should - I think you will not be able to find any assertion of mine that Christians are stupid in this thread (or any other but that is a different matter) and that you will see this element was introduced by SDW alone when he accused me of it.

Typically it is the ones who he wrongly attacks who are also attacked.

I guess you also disregard my earlier efforts to adopt a more conciliatory tone in this regard as well as my PM to you to that effect. Fair enough. It is what it is.

But get back to me when you, SDW or Trumpy can start a 'let's appreciate Lefties' or 'Good things about atheism' thread.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Do you really intend to come on these public forums and suggest that I should claim that believing in a 4000 year old earth, denying evolution, believing dinosaurs and humans were contemporary...all these things are not stupid?

Surely you cannot be serious?

Stupidity is not limited to the religious if it helps but surely there is no benefit in not pointing these things out.....it's how we progress...

I agree that believing those things constitutes ignorance, yes. I don't know about stupidity. Whatever, I won't mince words here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by segovius

He may not have been defending them but he was calling me out for calling Christians 'stupid' (which I did not do btw - so perhaps your Strawman antennae need attuning a bit more in his direction).

I replied with examples of ideas I think ARE stupid and I feel this is relevant as SOME CHRISTIANS DO hold these beliefs.

That's where I have a problem. By starting threads like this (taken with others over the years), one does not get the impression that you're only referencing "some" Christians. Why? Because you rarely if ever say so in the opening. You come off as anti-Christian for a lot of reasons, one of which is also the fact that you never start similar threads about "some" Muslims.

Quote:

So if you were to be honest - and you should - I think you will not be able to find any assertion of mine that Christians are stupid in this thread (or any other but that is a different matter) and that you will see this element was introduced by SDW alone when he accused me of it.

Typically it is the ones who he wrongly attacks who are also attacked.

I guess you also disregard my earlier efforts to adopt a more conciliatory tone in this regard as well as my PM to you to that effect. Fair enough. It is what it is.

But get back to me when you, SDW or Trumpy can start a 'let's appreciate Lefties' or 'Good things about atheism' thread.

I suppose I could start a thread like that if you like.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

I agree that believing those things constitutes ignorance, yes. I don't know about stupidity. Whatever, I won't mince words here.

Well...I never mentioned stupidity at all. You did.

Quote:

That's where I have a problem. By starting threads like this (taken with others over the years), one does not get the impression that you're only referencing "some" Christians. Why? Because you rarely if ever say so in the opening.

Or maybe you just switch off. Or maybe you want to see me as anti-Christian.

He may not have been defending them but he was calling me out for calling Christians 'stupid' (which I did not do btw - so perhaps your Strawman antennae need attuning a bit more in his direction).

I replied with examples of ideas I think ARE stupid and I feel this is relevant as SOME CHRISTIANS DO hold these beliefs.

So if you were to be honest - and you should - I think you will not be able to find any assertion of mine that Christians are stupid in this thread (or any other but that is a different matter) and that you will see this element was introduced by SDW alone when he accused me of it.

There is more than enough straw blowing around in these forums to outfit 50 manger scenes. . Do you deny that the argument was a strawman then?

Quote:

Typically it is the ones who he wrongly attacks who are also attacked.

Can you clarify this bit please?

Quote:

I guess you also disregard my earlier efforts to adopt a more conciliatory tone in this regard as well as my PM to you to that effect. Fair enough. It is what it is.

But get back to me when you, SDW or Trumpy can start a 'let's appreciate Lefties' or 'Good things about atheism' thread.

what pm are you referring to? I have not had any pm from you recently? I did note a change in your demeanor and argument style for about 2-3 weeks. Now, not so much anymore.

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

Haha...well..I'd prefer to say I was defending myself from a rather silly misapprehension.

Ok...

Quote:

Umm...not sure I can.... don't know what I was talking about there...

Guess that make two of us then.

Quote:

It takes two to tango...my game is still raised but the dancing partners need a bit more tuition till it looks good...

I disagree on this point. It take one to make a change and then having the fortitude to stand by it, otherwise it is not a change, it is a token gesture. I am willing to stand by you and not go down the old path, but you are the one who claimed they were changing and now you are saying you don't have to because nobody else did....

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

I disagree on this point. It take one to make a change and then having the fortitude to stand by it, otherwise it is not a change, it is a token gesture. I am willing to stand by you and not go down the old path, but you are the one who claimed they were changing and now you are saying you don't have to because nobody else did....

I'm kind of joking.

If you want the honest truth it's like this: the threads on Christianity and Islam were at the behest of Fellows, at least the Islam one was, and I was and am inspired by his example. I do believe he is a sincere and laudable Christian and as such should be respected.

However, the threads didn't quite live up to that ideal by the other posters (myself included probably) so I reverted to type.

But when it comes down to it, I'd say one thing: when faced with someone like Fellows then I do know that is in a way something to aspire to. I can try on regular occasions but somehow can't get past the point of accepting people who don't even see we could be better than we are,

So I adopt the sardonic posture you know and love so well!!

I'm hoping things might be better in the next incarnation...probably not...

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

If you want the honest truth it's like this: the threads on Christianity and Islam were at the behest of Fellows, at least the Islam one was, and I was and am inspired by his example. I do believe he is a sincere and laudable Christian and as such should be respected.

However, the threads didn't quite live up to that ideal by the other posters (myself included probably) so I reverted to type.

But when it comes down to it, I'd say one thing: when faced with someone like Fellows then I do know that is in a way something to aspire to. I can try on regular occasions but somehow can't get past the point of accepting people who don't even see we could be better than we are,

So I adopt the sardonic posture you know and love so well!!

I'm hoping things might be better in the next incarnation...probably not...

Sorry to hear that.

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi